Rule Victoria..

Victoria was Queen of England from 1837 to 1901, from the age of 18 to 81 which has a nice symmetry about it, this is of course the formative years of our nation (the treaty was signed in 1840) and other commonwealth nations. These years are known as the Victorian era and were an unprecedented period of industry, trade and conquest as Britain surged ahead on all fronts.


Many of the values, ideas and institutions that have sway today owe a great deal to this period of change and advancement and at times I wonder if we aren’t still living in a version of that same era. It was Queen Victoria and her rather prudish ideas about sex that gave us separate male and female toilets rather than the uni-sex arrangements common on continental Europe as an example of her direct influence but mostly it was the driving engine of the industrial revolution that made this time one of such change and influence rather than the queen herself.

It was a time when science was hitting its straps and dabbling in science became a popular pastime amongst the gentry. One of the things of interest became the past or perhaps more particularly antiquity. While Britain was charging around the globe grabbing countries it was also doing a bit of looting on the side. Not that the Victorians would have thought of it that way but the British Museum is not filled with priceless artefacts like the Elgin Marbles because they were presented as gifts, they were mostly taken as of right. (although in the case of the Marbles there was some doubtful paper work associated with them that might have given Lord Elgin permission, not withstanding that the Greek government would now like them back) The “desecration” or destruction of historic sites was not of much concern to these folk provided that bagged a mummy or two to show the folks back home how the trip went.

Another popular pastime were Barrow parties, and it did not involve moving the food in a wheelbarrow it was when the group would identify an ancient burial mound (known as a Barrow) and dig it up for a days entertainment and see what if anything was buried in there. This was done with no scientific rigour much less respect for the fact that the barrow was destroyed in the process.

Along side this sort of “fun” was wholesale development of Britain and many of the grand buildings to be seen in various British towns today were built in the Victorian era (including the British Museum building). This sort of thing lead to the enactment of The Ancient Monuments Act of 1882 which appointed an inspector who had little power other than to ask land owners nicely if they would mind awfully not desecrating the countries heritage. A short time after the act was passed a few individuals established the National Trust in 1884, which was a charity that tried to buy properties to protect them from redevelopment.

It is from these roots that our own Historic Places Trust and our ideas on preserving heritage spring from and as we can see it is a relatively modern idea that old buildings have some sort of value other than economic. Can you imagine the spluttering that would have erupted if you told a Victorian Gent that he couldn’t alter the look of his house because it was of “cultural or historical” significance?

Given the age of our country a lot of the buildings that have suffered structural damage in the recent Christchurch earthquake will owe some of their look to that great period of British expansion. They are also a product of that thinking when things were valued for their utility and the historic importance idea was still in its infancy, but that idea has now been thrust to centre stage as the powers that be consider saving or demolishing these "significant" buildings.

Significant above is in quotes because there are clearly arguments to be had, one mans trash and all that and none of this blog is an argument for the retention or destruction of these buildings but the generalised hand wringing that has accompanied the “red stickering” of many “historic” buildings in Christchurch is an interesting example of the ongoing clash between aesthetics, history, economics and land owners rights.

Which Victorian view will we adopt, progress and modernity or the preservation of history. Because in this case we have up to 50% (in terms of building numbers) destruction I suspect economics and progress will win out.